The board's server will undergo upgrade maintenance tonight, Nov 5, 2014, beginning approximately around 10 PM ET. Prepare for some possible down time during this process.
_________________ "The fatal flaw of all revolutionaries is that they know how to tear things down but don't have a f**king clue about how to build anything."
TL;DR - Patrick McHenry (R) believes that the votes are there to easily pass the budget bill if it is brought to the floor. But the Freedom Caucus would respond to the bill’s passage by ousting Mike Johnson as Speaker, and he thinks there’s a 50/50 chance that Johnson lets a shutdown happen rather than risk that.
There's a "50-50" chance of a government shutdown in early March, says House Financial Services Chairman Patrick McHenry, of North Carolina, and it's House Speaker Mike Johnson's fear of being ousted that will determine the outcome. And at the same time, McHenry says the House is heading to a procedural "nuclear" war over funding for Ukraine.
"I think the odds [of a shutdown] are 50-50 at this point," McHenry, Republican of North Carolina, told CBS News on "The Takeout" this week. "This is a preventable disaster ... Had we done this in November and December, the policy would be about the same, maybe a little bit better than it is now. But the politics would be much better than they are now."
McHenry said Johnson is still adjusting to the difficulties of leading a small and restive GOP majority. Fear of losing his speakership stalks all shutdown scenarios, he said.
Johnson and Democratic Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer have already negotiated overall spending amounts for defense and domestic programs. All that remains are specific allocations under individual spending bills — and the political backlash that may come from hard-right House Republicans. McHenry said Johnson's fear of that backlash could trigger a shutdown.
"[If] it's fear of the deal that drives him, [that] will then result in a government shutdown," McHenry said. "What I believe is, we will get higher spending and less policy as a result of the government shutdown."
McHenry also said there's a sizable majority of House Republicans and Democrats who support the Senate-passed national security bill that includes military aid to Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan.
"They support 80 to 90% of what's in the bill," McHenry said. "About two-thirds of the House is of that opinion. It will get done. It will just be a question of how it gets done and how long it will take to get done."
But the current impediment, McHenry said, is Johnson.
"What is axiomatic about the House is that any speaker can stand in the way of the majority will on the House floor for a period of time — but not permanently," McHenry said. "My hope is that the speaker will come around to seeing this in a very sensible way."
the nonsense with kevin was of his own doing. he wanted speaker so bad that he made deals with MAGA (Gaetz) that said if you are unhappy with me it will only take one vote to oust me
_________________ Did the Mother Fucker pay extra to yell?
I can understand why you’d think that it might. The process would certainly be more proactive and productive with actual political calculus at the helm. A paralyzing ideological purity in any direction ultimately benefits no one.
But the forces producing this inaction would be here either way. And they would think that this is how they win either way.
McCarthy’s solution was to go around them, and make a deal with Democrats (hardly a bad thing to do). That was enough for them to torpedo his Speakership, so I don’t see any evidence whatsoever that there was sustainability to that approach. In fact, I think the fact that he had to give them rope to hang him with in order to even become Speaker says it all. I think reaching across parties was a good approach, but it’s evidentially not one that could be maintained across years…not barring a major shift in power dynamics within the party.
The MAGAs expect to hold power regardless of who is Speaker. They will commit intra-party arson in order to get their way, and they do not negotiate…full stop.
So I do think it’s better that they have to play their hostage-taking games out in the open, rather than in closed door meetings with a normalizing Speaker who has no actual sway over them. I think the best thing for the Republican Party right now would be for non-MAGA legislators to have to come to terms with the fact that no amount of power and no amount of being heard will ever make their far right compatriots more willing to share the pie. As far as they are concerned, it is their pie. How dare you covet it.
If you are asking, do I wish we lived in a world where Republican moderates could continue to guide the legislative process and limit MAGAs to a needed but not dominant political force? Sure. Yes. Please. But that has not happened, and it continues not to happen, and so something else is needed.
I haven’t seen any evidence that hiding their dysfunction behind closed doors moves us in the direction of a resolution. Better to let them do their dance in public.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 84 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum
